One of the most compelling myths propagated in public life is the presentation of the UK as an American ‘poodle’. Before hammering the nails into the coffin of the UK-US partnership, politicians and their public should not dismiss the sheer historical resilience of the relationship, nor avoid the immutable limitations of an integrated European defence platform. Co-operation between the transatlantic partners will be essential given the potential for a rapid and game changing deterioration in the security context either in Europe or perhaps as a consequence of an extension of the conflict in Afghanistan. Assuming British statesman wish to play a role in stewarding an international system broadly sympathetic to UK interests they need to hold close to the US. Dispelling the ‘poodle’ mythology is essential if Britain is going to rediscover a credible defence posture and emerge from the terrible mess many believe her grand strategy to be mired in. The forthcoming Strategic Defence Review (SDR) is an opportune moment for the new government in London to demonstrate this subtlety of hand and save Britain from being relegated to a third rate power.
Read the rest of this excellent article from lee Bruce, here
Digg it!
Add to Delicious!
Share on Facebook!
Share on Reddit!
Stumble it
Add to Technorati
6 Comments
The ‘Poodle’ syndrome, in my own simple honest opinion, was typified in the ‘Yo Blair!’ incident. There was a simple lack of common curtesy at statesman level.
If the leader of one nation cannot display simple respect and manners to another, what does that say about their attitude to the nation as a whole?
If your neighbour spoke to you in such a manner what favours would you do for him? Would you lend him your car? Would you let your son or daughter risk their life for him? Whether its neighbours in a street or world leaders on the global stage, human nature and social dynamics are no different. It’s a case of ‘If the leader sneezes, the whole country catches a cold.’
Never mind historical connections, if you want a ‘Special Relationship’ then a greater level of respect and appreciation needs to been conveyed to those making the sacrifices. This was clearly missing during the Bush/Blair years. My impression of this this relationship was that of a sychophantic yes man and his superior.
Now that we have an higher order of intelligence in the White House and a new leader in Downing Street, we have the chance to start the relationship afresh.
As to whether we are a poodle or not, depends on the relationship between out leader and the President of the US, and whether he has the strength of character to say no when its not in our national interests.
Yeah, I can’t agree with this, there is no myth to bust, we have been their lap dog, and UK interests are not always best served by our foreign policy being subservient to that of the USA.
I agree with Jed. Blair turned the “poodle thing” into reality, not myth. It was completely obvious.
I agree with some of the comments but it is important not to forget who got the most out of the special relations. If we are talking practicalities, whatever credibility, moral support and diplomatic assistance the US has gained from its relationship with the UK, added to the very real and practical involvement of the UK in defence and security issues, still does falls far behind the real cost of having the US security umbrella for the duration of the Cold War (we are not talking about morality here, but rather about practical issues and outcomes). In this respect, maintaining the special relationship could be more in the interest of the UK than in the interest of the US. The attitudes on both sides of the Atlantic are unclear, but some elements were discussed in detail at a conference organized by the Royal United Services Institute, London and the Legatum Institute, entitled “The UK-US Alliance: Still Special or just another Partnership?” and the subsequent article in the Wall Street Journal on May 19. (Obama and the ‘Special Relationship’, William Inboden and Lisa Aronsson). This is the program of the conference.
The UK-US Alliance: Still Special or just another Partnership?
A RUSI-Legatum Institute Conference
18 May 2010
Royal United Services Institute
Conference Programme
0915 Welcome Remarks and Survey Launch
Sir Paul Lever, Vice President, RUSI
Dr William Inboden, Senior Vice President, Legatum Institute
0945 Session One: UK Public Opinion: Political Will for Real Partnership?
Has the gap over the Iraq War closed and how does the UK public view the US now? Do historically strong ties have a sustainable basis to continue?
Have recent frictions further eroded ties between the two nations or is there renewed interest in the UK for a closer strategic partnership with the US?
Does the UK share America’s global vision and do the two powers overlap in their foreign policy approaches? Does the UK see itself as closer to the EU or the US?
Chair: Bronwen Maddox, Chief Foreign Commentator, The Times
Speakers: Jeremy Shapiro, Senior Advisor, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, U.S. Department of State
Professor Peter Feaver, Professor of Political Science, Duke University and former Special Advisor to the National Security Council
Sir Christopher Meyer, British Ambassador to the United States (1997‐2003)
1130 Session Two: NATO at a Crossroads? Afghanistan and the Reform Agenda
Do the US and the UK share the same level of commitment to NATO?
How can NATO reform decision-making procedures to improve agility, flexibility and responsiveness? Can the consensus principle be re-considered at any level?
Is it right for Afghanistan to dominate longer-term thinking for defence planning?
What lessons should the US, NATO and the UK learn from operational experience in Afghanistan since the implementation of the new strategy?
Chair: Professor Michael Clarke, Director, RUSI
Speakers: Ambassador Kurt Volker, former United States Permanent Representative to NATO
Professor Christopher Coker, Professor of International Relations, LSE
Geoff Hoon, British politician, former Defence Secretary
1400 Session Three: Renewing the Defence and Intelligence Partnership
How does defence spending measure up against national priorities and how will cuts in the UK affect the special relationship?
What lessons can be learned from the American QDR and what are the prospects for new thinking in a foreign policy-led UK Strategic Defence Review?
How can the US and the UK improve defence co-operation after the Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty?
What is the state of the intelligence relationship?
Chair: Dr Alexander Mirtchev, Atlantic Council and Krull Corp.
Speakers: Dr Edgar Buckley, Senior Vice President for EU, NATO and European Cooperation, Thales
Sir David Omand, Vice President RUSI, previously Permanent Secretary of the Home Office
Dr Kori Schake, Research Fellow, Hoover Institution and Former Director for Defense Strategy and Requirements, National Security Council
1545 Session Four: Evaluating Leadership: Obama and the new British Government
What will the relationship be between the new UK Government and the Obama Administration?
Can the UK reject a ‘strategic shrinkage’ despite economic pressures? To what extent do the US and the UK still share global interests, responsibilities and foreign policy approaches?
How can both sides freshen and deepen their alliance? Will the next UK Government be able to take on a position of leadership in Europe?
Chair: Dr William Inboden, Senior Vice President, Legatum Institute
Speakers: Dr Karen Donfried, Executive Vice President of the German Marshall Fund of the United States
Lord Robertson, former Secretary General of NATO
Dr Robin Niblett, Director, Chatham House
Sandra Kaiser, Minister Counselor for Public Affairs, Embassy of the United States, London
Moulton G
The UK gained nothing more from collective security than Germany or Italy, but gave(and gives) a damned site more.
Arguement falls at first hurdle.
session 2 speaker, geoff hoon oh dear god!!!